Posted
by
samzenpuson Wednesday October 05, 2011 @07:57PM
from the I-got-99-problems-but-a-glitch-aint-one dept.

Back in 2009 we ran a story about a Chicago based non-profit company that trained high-functioning autistic people to be software testers. Two years later Aspiritech has grown to offer services in Belgium, Japan and Israel. Autistic debuggers are used by large clients like Oracle and Microsoft and have proven to be so good in fact that companies are now recruiting to meet demand. From the article: "Aspiritech's board of directors includes social service providers, therapists, a vocational expert and a software engineer. The nonprofit also received start-up advice and consultation from Keita Suzuki, who has co-founded a similar company, called Kaien, in Japan. Aspiritech has hired and trained seven recruits with Asperger's syndrome. These recruits have since worked on software-testing projects for smartphone and cloud-computing applications. Aspiritech now offers functional-, compatibility- and regression-testing, as well as test-case development, with experience in cloud-computing platforms including Salesforce."

Is just recruit people who bought minecraft. It's really part of the same population set, but these one's are already used to using computers for 10 hours a day doing the same repetitive thing over and over.

We don't have the faintest idea, when you get down to it, what causes autism. There's a whole damn pile of candidate genes, but none of them have been linked to a mechanism or even definitively linked to a particular mutation or other defect within the gene itself.

We know about as much about autism, really, as alchemists knew about chemistry. Just because we understand genetics and ecology on a limited level doesn't mean we've made even one firm, proven conclusion about the source of autism.

OTOH, reactions to vaccines do happen, and in some cases can be fatal. If a reaction was near-fatal, it could cause brain damage (eg heart stops beating for long enough that bits of the brain starts to die) and the resulting mental disability could share symptoms with autism. One case would be all the nutjobs need to 'prove' their link.

The way I see it, even if there was a 1-in-a-million chance of something bad happening as a result of vaccination, it is more likely that something bad will happen if you don

There's this impressive new field of mathematics called "statistics" - you may have heard about it already on Slashdot. Using statistics, yes, you can often make statements like "x does not cause y". By comparing people with and without x to see if they have the same or different rates of y. If the rates differ, x and y are related. If the rates are the same, then, no, x and y are not related.

Conveniently, this was done back when people started blaming autism on vaccines. The rates were the same. The severi

You can’t disprove a negative statement.
I can’t prove that vaccines don’t cause autism – there are exceptions.
I can’t prove that unicorns don’t exist – They are shy.All we can say about both is that there is no positive proof about either.

Possible coincidence- the one year vaccines happen to come near 18 months- and one of the most common types of autism has a regression at 18 months, though it can now be diagnosed earlier with an MRI, before the regression happens.

Dozens of identical/fraternal twin studies, initially carried out in the 70s, prove unquestionably that autism is up to 92% genetic. While it's been hard to point to specific genetic anomalies that cause it, it does not invalidate its genetic roots. The genetics of autism is more nuanced and complex than we realised, as are other inherited conditions, it's not genes but also involves e.g. copy number variations.

No, unfortunately, if only it where that simple. Womb environment cannot be separated from genetic or epigenetic influence via these methods which only conciser one generation, or even for grandparent/ parent/ child traces, particularly because all three can be multi-generational. Womb environment can appear to have affects 2 generations after the trigger if you are pregnant with a girl at the time of the trigger (as eggs are formed during gestation not after birth). Epigenetic effects although non genet

Science only very rarely shows that some hypothesis is correct. More often, it shows that every other tested hypothesis is wrong, and that the one that's left is just the most likely.

The "vaccines cause autism" hypothesis has been tested, and is shown to most likely be wrong. The "magic space fairy causes autism" hypothesis hasn't yet been tested, or the "too many hard sneezes while pregnant causes autism" hypothesis, nor a few hundred others. We have such a long way to go...

Now, I don't like such absolutes as "never", because they're so... absolute. It's fully possible to, while following the scientific method perfectly, prove a hypothesis correct. It just takes a very particular kind of hypothesis, and a very particular kind of experiment.

As an example, consider the hypothesis that of Foo, Bar, and Baz, Foo is the most quiggle. This hypothesis can indeed be proven correct, but only by testing every possibility, which of course results in proving other hypotheses wrong.

As for the fields of pharmacology and medical science, your complaint of worthless research seems to be based on the assumption that only perfect knowledge is worthwhile. Quite the contrary, actually: Medical treatments can be effective even if we don't know why. The pain-relieving quality of willow bark was known 2300 years before its pharmacological mechanism was understood. Research into new treatments is very valuable, even without full understanding of the mechanisms involved. Of course such knowledge is preferred, but that's another several years of research after the initial findings.

The only "huge issue" I see with pharmacology and medical science is that they're so intently watched by the media and "science fans" for any sign of a coming miracle cure, in the constant hunt for headlines. Any finding of anything affecting any kind of cancer cells is reported as a "potential cure". In the actual research paper, the findings are almost always stated exactly as they should be: some indications, little concrete evidence, and suggestions for further avenues of research. Other sciences are picking up this attention, as well, but still usually maintain their integrity. Electrical engineering hits the news whenever some transparent, tiny, or shiny prototype finally works. Psychologists are asked for comment when there's a serial killer running amok. Sociology has its fifteen minutes of fame when there's some new theory to explain 4chan. Disease is just constantly affecting millions of people, so it's always interesting news.

That kind of thinking is how we got the ether theory of the 1800s. By investigating every possibility, you inherently assume you have enumerated every possibility, which is not a valid assumption to make outside of a purely mathematical model.

By the way, there is a very interesting Sci-fi book called The Speed of Dark [amazon.com] where Autism is central to the story (In terms of Sci-fi, it's a near future type of Sci-fi, so it really isn't about science-fiction if that's what you're looking for). This same idea reminds me of that book. All the analysts had a particular form of Autism.

The audio version is quite good. I actually didn't read the book, but just listened to its full audio version.

Hollywood's sensationalism has brought us the comic-book idea of what is essentially "game balance" in real life. In real life, you don't gain magical super powers just because you're blind and you aren't somehow a super-genius just because you're shy, introverted and obsessed with details. Autism is not a romantic backstory about how a young boy was crippled at an early age and then developed his mental powers to overcome this weakness. One does not gain flaws for points to spend on

It doesn't make you a genius, but it does make you valuable in certain fields. The cytotechnologists who review Pap smears and kick all the remotely abnormal ones to a pathologist are people with a desire to do a repetitive job requiring attention to detail. Accountants, too.

Yeah my son plays piano and we attended a graduation ceremony where every child played one piece. One boy spent the whole time fiddling with a bit of string attached to his father's bag. When it was his turn to play his parents prompted him to walk down to the front of the room where he stood for a bit, clearly put off by the number of people there. After a moment he sat down at the piano and played like practically nobody I have ever heard before. Then he finished, walked back to his seat and continued to

The term "spectrum" is a bit misleading and gives the impression of being one-dimensional, like an "autism score from 0-100". The very page you've linked to shows it's a bit more multi-dimensional than that. Essentially, there's a collection of different symptoms (say, ABCDE), and if you've got some of them, you have a Pervasive Development Disorder (PDD). If you've got ALL of them (ABCDE) you've got a really bad case of utterly low-functioning autism, but that's fantastically rare. If you've got ABC but no

I would point out that even for somebody with asperger's, religion can provide an experimental test bed for objective testing of moral rules. Which is why I like reading about the older religions, they've had more time to experiment, and thus reject moral hypothesis that do not work for human survival in the long term.

Asperger's is a mild form of autism. One of it's characteristics is that the people who have it focus very intently on what they're doing for extended periods of time. As a result, they make excellent programmers and testers because they'll put in hours without even realizing the time has gone by.

The really interesting thing is that parents can ignore the cognitive dissonance of accepting that their precious snowflake can lurch between having autism and the ability to spend twelve hours staring at a ame of minecraft because they enjoy it, and ADD where they can't sit still and read a book for five minutes because they don't enjoy reading.,

I wouldn't say it's the reverse. They're more like expressions of the same thing. With ADD, attention is side tracked in many different ways. With Asperger's Syndrome, the attention is stuck on a few special interests. That can work fantastically well if the aspie finds the topic at hand interesting, but can be fantastically awful if the topic is uninteresting. Myself, I have a great deal of trouble focusing on anything I'm not interested in and usually find my thinking returning to my special interest de jour. One trick I use when faced with a boring task is to find a clever or more optimal way to do it, since that challenge can make it more interesting. In either case, the challenge is what makes it easy for me to get in the zone and work at something for hours, but being interrupted while in the zone is frustrating and I'll usually avoid getting in the zone if I'm likely to be interrupted within an hour or two and my output will be low. I often wonder what it's like to be "normal" and to be able to get stuff done while only being half focused (not in the zone).

In your comment, you used the word "aspie", which I've heard a few times before. Is it appropriate for folks who are not autistic to use the term, or is it similar to use of the "N-word" by some black folk?

Yes, I know. My question was whether it was only appropriate for persons with Asperger's syndrome to use the term, much like it is now somewhat only appropriate for black people to use the word "nigger".

Yes, I know. My question was whether it was only appropriate for persons with Asperger's syndrome to use the term, much like it is now somewhat only appropriate for black people to use the word "nigger".

I guess so. If others around me call me an "aspie", it bothers the crap out of me. I just hate the term, not because of what it means, but because of the sound of the word. I know, I know. I'm weird. I hate the word "inappropriate", as well. It's because it was overused on me when I was in school. Call me a bad kid or a jerk that isn't following the rules all you want, but don't call me a repetitively used term that isn't necessarily true -OR- fitting of the components.

I much prefer the term aspie to aspergian. Some kind of shorthand must be used in lieu of "a person afflicted with Asperger's Syndrome." I would not be offended if someone used the term aspie at all. As the thread has shown, others may be. I think a lot depends on context. If someone is trolling, then yes, it can be derogatory, but my own default feelings about the term are positive.

Yep. Paying more attention to things you're interested in is neuro-typical behavior.

Certainly. The difference is degree. Everyone gets happy and sad, but too much is the essence of bipolar disorder.

I suppose I assume most people can focus largely at will. Based on my observations of others, I tend to have a lot more difficulty in getting focused on something, but when I do, my focus is far more intense (and I'm far more productive). I merely wish it were more consistent, like it appears to me like it is for

There's more to Asperger's than just a degree of obsession and a lack of social skills. If that's all you have, you're not autistic, you're just a nerd. I don't know your situation, but if you have not yet been diagnosed, do not claim AS. Having met people that actually have AS, and having met tons of people who claim to have AS because they think it helps explain why they're socially awkward and obsessed with computers, I can tell you the difference is night and day.

I would say, as an Aspie, that it is absolutely the degree. When I am focused on something, it is near impossible to get me sidetracked. When I am having trouble focusing on something, it doesn't get done.

I would say, as an Aspie, that it is absolutely the degree. When I am focused on something, it is near impossible to get me sidetracked. When I am having trouble focusing on something, it doesn't get done.

Again, this applies to many, many people. In fact, I'd say it applies to almost any knowledge worker. You are not a beautiful and unique snowflake.

Sure, you can train someone to be a good software tester, but it is so mind-numbingly boring that most people loose focus eventually, take shortcuts and miss those edge cases that is the whole point of software testing.

I guess they are saying that people with Autism have a capacity for detailed, repetitive work that far exceeds regular people.

Software testing is not boring. Most people ignore or don't understand what is software testing. They just think it's just about using a software following a given written scenario (the test case). That's only a small part of the job, and when it's repetitive you have to automate it.

Autism is not irrelevant. Cognitive style of autism can be positively used in employment, once a workplace understands autism's specific strengths. The most salient features are Weak Central Coherence and Need for Routine. If workplace adapts to the autistic cognitive style, everyone will benefit. There is too much focus on deficits rather then splinter skills and cognitive strengths.

Weak Central Coherence - means autistic people are detail obsessed, they observe smallest parts and elements of the environment, and construct the overall picture from individual parts. This is ideal for identifying and spotting anomalies in software, identifying mistakes, dealing with information. For example, it's been known for years that autistic people are far superior in locating hidden features in the Embedded Figures Test.

Need for Routine - repetitive and otherwise boring tasks are soothing, enjoyed and relaxing. Furthermore, attention is not lost nor mistakes made, when autistic person is engaged in repetitive tasks.

Because people with worse conditions physically cannot interact properly with other people to find that skill you talk about.

But I have to admit, Asperger's kids love checklists, predictability. They typically have higher IQs that put them as "gifted" until the "dealing with people" factor kicks in.

Personally, I think there are a LOT of accountants and engineers out there with milder versions of the disorder. They have hit a "ceiling" in their jobs because they can't get over the people skills. The aerospac

I think that a common pair of parents is the "engineer-schoolteacher" combo. Both groups that attract higher intelligences, both groups that attract list, detail, slightly socially reserved people. I think the combo brings out the effect more because they tend to be "by the numbers" type parents, but not overly touchy-feely. They have all the things around for the child to display the higher intelligence... But they miss the signs that the child's not acting and responding like a KID should. We tend to not

" The movie "Falling Down" is like a poster for how Asperger kids/adults feel every day (if a bit sensational)"

Yes, but most of us, by age 25 or 26, learn enough coping skills to keep the violent meltdowns at bay (at least for the most part). Doesn't mean I don't fantasize about finding a nice tall tree in Forest Park and shooting towers in Portland, however.

I would say that testing your own code is the worst thing to do, as you know how it works and will (possibly subconsciously) input data which will either work, or bomb out gracefully. By all means to some quick debugging yourself, but you need fresh eyes to test your system properly.

It just so happens that aspies seem to perform this task remarkably well.

I would say that testing your own code is the worst thing to do, as you know how it works and will (possibly subconsciously) input data which will either work, or bomb out gracefully. By all means to some quick debugging yourself, but you need fresh eyes to test your system properly.

It just so happens that aspies seem to perform this task remarkably well.

I found a bug in a Java servlet at a fortune-500 company that a TEAM of over 50 software engineers spent MONTHS of time and hundreds of thousands of dollars in equipment to try and find it, in order to fix it. Really, they only allowed a memory leak to last longer until the garbage collect cycled into a non-stop loop.

I found the bug in less than 5 minutes. Guess what happened to me after I found it? Anyone who didn't guess that I was "let go for mysterious reasons" doesn't have Asperger's;)

I would say that testing your own code is the worst thing to do, as you know how it works and will (possibly subconsciously) input data which will either work, or bomb out gracefully.

Testing your own code should *always* be the first step in the testing process. Ideally, stepping through it line by line. It's precisely because you know how it works that you are the best person to do this. Knowing it will soon be handed over to a testing team can help eliminate any inherent bias you may have, but even if it doesn't, it should increase the quality of code that is being tested later in the process.

I have asperger.. I'm glad that there's more & more peeps who see that its not a disability; but rather a unique way of looking at the world.

Its really not the same worldpicture you 'normals' see... I can really get upset if i see 'wrongs' in this world. Just as i feel in a way that it's the same as seeing 'wrongs' in software or hardware. I wont be able to put it behind me; or just to buy something to make me feel good... Or just accept that my boss says its the rigth thing; or that there's no money or

Actually, learning to leave mistakes in writing and "just write" is a big part of coping as a kid. I'd bet the GP that typed that could tell you every typo in the post. From memory. Getting past the errors is what Asperger's kids in particular cannot get over. They have mini panic attacks over every little mistake. It looks like ADD because they cannot process past life's little hiccups and retreat to something routine and familiar, like meaningless facts.

Online essays don't necessarily point either way -- my text messages often span over 3 messages (diagnosed nearly 5 years ago, had plenty of time to deal with the symptoms), and I've read about a high-functioning autistic guy who's one of the best speechwriters in America (Send in the Idiots, a short book if anyone is interested). Check out some of the posts over at wrongplanet [wrongplanet.net] some time if you don't believe me; sitting behind a screen makes it a lot easier to communicate, as one can think about what they want to say and take their time with it. Also, there's nothing like body language to compound the difficulty of communicating.

Seriously, I'm pretty sure Autism traits are just generally valuable in many programming and computer related situations, and it is not at all uncommon for engineers to have some basic Autistic traits. I kinda thought this was common knowledge.

Still, it's nice seeing an effort to integrate some of those have have more social issues into productive jobs.

The title says it all. It's just a logical extension of division of labor, really.
Forget the current reprogenetics tendencies and the development of genetic screening of embryos; in short order we'll be making better workers. I can just imagine the advertisements for workers with genes turned off for boredom for repetitive low skill tasks, soldiers with atrophied brain areas responsible for emotion, and all the other goodies.
Welcome to the new utopia/dystopia (depending on whether you're an employer or e

There are definite similarities, to the point that I wonder if Vinge was only slightly exaggerating the "in the zone" focus known to people who really get into their work while hours slip by. Artists, programmers, people who build toothpick replicas of battleships - it can happen to almost anyone.

By specifically using high functioning autistic people, you are already making the exemption that invalidates the whole concept. High functioning means that they can more or less function in a normal environment, doing normal work and living a normal work. Over 10% of the IT workforce I've been in the last 10 years, has been high functioning autistic people, including administrators, DBAs, penetration testers, indeed software testers, and even a team leader. Come back when you can use every "rain man" offer

Maybe it's over-self-diagnosed, but there's a proper clinical diagnosis, and it's a serious condition. The person with Asperger's does have significant strengths, though, and they tend to align with technology skills, so there's no real surprise here to those who know about Aperger's.

Condition? I (and a lot of leading Asperger's advocates) think it's more a type of brain than a condition. I was in the waiting room one day while my son was in an Asperger's class, and noticed that three of us dads were discussing the nature of human consciousness. Not your standard dad discussion. Point being, we're a breed apart from the 'regular' dads.

Asperger's syndrome is not Autism. As for it being in the "spectrum" that is unproven; just because some outward traits overlap on the edge of both doesn't mean that they are indeed connected. Eventually it may be proven one is genetic and the other is biological or partially developmental. The connection between the two may not exist or it may be weak; but we must lump the whole group into 1 area for some reason. Perhaps it is because normal people are not that smart? Its one thing to not care about a sub

It's on the spectrum because modern understanding of Autism is more about the part of the head that interacts, mimics, copies, predicts what other people do seems to be broken. As they understand Autism, it is a separate thing from retardation. Most Autistic kids have reasonable normal IQs... The thing that automagically learns language, mannerisms, facial expressions is broken.

Asperger's kids share that link because they can only interact with what is spelled out.. Teasing about childish things becomes sev

When were you diagnosed? I learned C when I was 11, wrote video games in C at 12, hacked assembly at 14, and got a life at 15. My point is that, if your basis for belief in your "aspie-ness" is self diagnosed attention to detail and social awkwardness, then you might just be socially awkward and have a lot of attention for detail.

Kid. I started out with 40 different dialects of basic and three different processors of assembly. And wrote my own word processor at age 13, with spell check, in a version of basic that didn't even have fonts.

My son would take a LOT of work on social skills to "just work". But he would be VERY good at something like what is posted. Give him a clear checklist of expectations and good tools designed to stay on task and I could see him fitting that job.

With the state of the job markets now, my kid would never survive the modern sociopath interview process to get that exact same work at a "normal" company.

3. You don't read emotion from the developers at all and read their code and specifications without it. This is tremendously valuable because you don't make any assumptions about their code (as an a "aspy" I'm always asking developers is THAT what you really meant). As an aspy we know damn well most NTs don't actually mean exactly what they say - so we either apply it and show that the literal application is BUNK or we ask for clarification.

What has been the bane of my existence at most places of work is most peoples' inability to tolerate that. They always want things understood exactly as it comes out of their mouth, no questions, no alternatives. Just crystal clear.

Yeah, that doesn't happen. The alternative is that if they do answer questions and you -do- eventually find the true meaning or statement, their anger levels go up. Since I have the ability to read body language very w